[omro]

Hi there, I was just wondering what people's opinions were for the East/West line.

Should it:

Have both east/west tracks on Main
Have both east/west tracks on King
Have one track on Main and one track on King
Have both tracks on a different east/west artery road altogether

[geoff's two cents]

Both on Main.

The primary reasons would be that Main is the street most in need of a boost, and it has the most lanes for the longest stretch. Main is also closer to the GO station.

I'm not in favor of having one on King and one on Main, as King goes down to two lanes through the international village, the city has no intent of running LRT through Westdale, and because transit is easiest to use when both directions run on the same street.

With the latter reason in mind, it wouldn't be a big deal downtown, but the distance between Main and King is considerably wider at Dundurn, and somewhat ridiculously so on the west side of the 403. This wouldn't matter for myself, but it would make transit less user-friendly for the elderly, the handicapped, etc., who would be less inclined to walk for such distances in inclement weather. Without LRT on King, the street could still be served by non-rapid bus service.

The only major problem with this is the fact that Main would have two less lanes (three, if the city did the logical thing and widened the sidewalks), which - again - brings up the issue of two-way conversion for Main and King, and the whole nasty bunch of problems that go along with that - I'm thinking primarily of the 403 interchanges. In a perfect world, we would either be able to do those conversions, or the city would run LRT between King and Main (George), and go underground at Bay. This would, however, mean buying up property all along the line, demolishing part of the Fortino's plaza, constructing a new bridge across the 403, etc.

In my opinion, that is the only (!) serious difficulty with avoiding the King and Main separation - but having the east and west lines separated by such a distance would make the city's LRT something of a laughing stock among Canada's major cities.

The city has made so many enormous mistakes in the last half century - LRT is something it should definitely do right.

[omro]

My opinion, as I've stated in other threads, is that both tracks for the east/west line should be laid on Main. I've summarised them below, but I might have missed something.

Cost

It would be cheaper to have both lines on the same street.

It would not be necessary to disrupt two streets and dig up two streets during construction.
It could be constructed by only one team, rather than two teams working in parallel on two streets, a major saving in manpower and time.
It would be possible to share stops in each direction, rather than building separate stops on separate streets.
Signage would only be needed on one street.
Technology to control traffic lights and the LRT's power system would only be needed on one street.
More track would have to be laid on King Street than on Main Street.
It would be cheaper to maintain.


Simplicity and common sense

To have both tracks on the same street would make the most sense.

Simpler to explain verbally and visually.
Simpler for tourists and visitors to the city.
It would be simpler for drivers to navigate.
The track starts and ends on Main, so why split it in the middle.
Easier to maintain.


Road Width

Main is a consistently wider road. It doesn't get as narrow as King does in places. Putting LRT on Main would not prohibit an eventual conversion to 2-way traffic, however one LRT track on King could potentially doom that street to 1-way traffic permanently.

Also the two LRT lines will be able to run quite closely together, as having the LRT on fixed tracks allowing the carriages travelling in different directions to pass very closely by each other, saving space overall.

Distance

King Street meanders more than Main Street does. As a result King Street is actually longer from point A to point B than Main. This would result in more track needed to be laid and maintained. It would also result in a slighly longer travel time in one direction than the other, unless the trams ran at differing speeds, which would need to be explained in any literature or timetables.

Investment

Main street needs the investment more than King does, as there are parts of that street which are totally desolate. It has the scope for the greater improvement from LRT. King street will naturally improve as investment into Hamilton increases regardless of whether the LRT is put on it or not.

[raisethehammer]

I agree with your first 4 points.
Investment will happen on both streets regardless of where the tracks lie.
I actually think King needs the investment more...it's got several km of streetwall that needs new life breathed into it.
regardless, your points are bang on.

[BrianE]

Chalk me up for both lines on Main St And keep Main St as one way eastbound. The very second that they throw the switch on the LRT lines they should start converting King St. to 2-way. Or convert King to 2 way while they build the LRT.

[omro]

Investment will happen on both streets regardless of where the tracks lie. I actually think King needs the investment more...it's got several km of streetwall that needs new life breathed into it.

I think you argued my point ;)

Main is desolate. King has the shops.

Any increase in investment into the city, on the whole, will rejuvinate and breathe new life into the shopping district as a byproduct of that investment.

Putting LRT on Main will significantly improve Main and have a trickle down effect upon King. I doubt that it would happen in reverse to the same extent.

[matt602]

I'm torn between both on Main and one on each. The reason I sway toward both on Main is because Main's size is already perfect for both directions while maintaining a decent traffic flow and street parking/bike lanes/etc. I definitely don't think both directions could be handled on King St., especially through downtown between Wellington to about Catherine. It narrows down to 2 lanes Westbound at Wellington, which gets very busy as it is at rush hour.

On the other hand I can't argue with the fact that King has a much better streetscape/streetwall for LRT. Possibly Main St's "parking lot corridor" could turn into some kind of condo boom in certain spots downtown, but King would benefit in a much more fitting, urban way I think.

In the end I think they should both go on Main, and we'll just have to hope there's a decent amount of spillover to King.

[MsMe]

And a real tricky area would be the Delta. And may not even to be able to put this in that area due to it so narrow.

And another tricky area would be going around the traffic circle. Unless they took it down Main St. to Reid Ave. Then along Queenston Rd. Some streets in Hamilton sure aren't laid out well to do other things with for sure.

[flar]

I'm leaning toward having both directions on Main. It's obviously wide enough but it also has the most space for development around it with parking lots, plazas, fast food and gas stations all being candidates for redevelopment. I can imagine a shift where we see some infill rentals along Main in the form of 3-6 storey apartments to accommodate the people displaced by gentrification of older homes. If I was a developer I'd be building medium sized apartments now, even without LRT.

I don't think that LRT will directly help retail. Just because the track runs in front of the storefront won't make it a success. Retail on King will be helped by more people living in the lower city, especially more affluent people. LRT should lead to more residential density along its corridor. Hopefully it will lead to employment along its corridor as well. I think that would really help King St. retail, even if the LRT ran on Main.

[omro]

The only way LRT will directly help retail is by taking people to the retailer, so Eastgate Square Mall will be helped, but that's irrelevant to this part of the discussion. I agree with Flar that having the LRT run past the shops is unlikely to help them. Greater investment on the whole, more money and people in the downtown will help King Street shopping.

Of course all of this is totally academic if no one who is involved in the actual planning and feasibility for the LRT on King/Main is even aware of these points.

[Jon Dalton]

How about both tracks on King and have it LRT-only in the narrow stretch? Cars would be rerouted at Bay and Wellington to follow Main or Wilson streets which would become two-way. Imagine the possibilities for streetscaping the Village area. Just thinking outside the box. As has been mentioned here so many times, there are so many lanes of traffic nearby. The system should be configured to maximize economic spinoff, rather than to preserve existing traffic flow.

[flar]

^^I've thought about that, but I still think taking cars off King even for a small stretch == complete retail death.

[omro]

We have a vote for putting the tracks onto a different street all together, would the voter please put their preferred alternate east/west street route.

[FairHamilton]

I'm leaning toward having both directions on Main. It's obviously wide enough but it also has the most space for development around it with parking lots, plazas, fast food and gas stations all being candidates for redevelopment. I can imagine a shift where we see some infill rentals along Main in the form of 3-6 storey apartments to accommodate the people displaced by gentrification of older homes. If I was a developer I'd be building medium sized apartments now, even without LRT.

I don't think that LRT will directly help retail. Just because the track runs in front of the storefront won't make it a success. Retail on King will be helped by more people living in the lower city, especially more affluent people. LRT should lead to more residential density along its corridor. Hopefully it will lead to employment along its corridor as well. I think that would really help King St. retail, even if the LRT ran on Main.

My point exactly, when I stated earlier that 2 way conversion is a must.

Slowing down the pace and noise along those one-way streets is necessary to create communities/neighbourhoods where people can exist and co-exist with cars and transit.

I can get from King & Sherman to downtown in 5 or 6 minutes on a bus, what difference is an LRT going to make to my neighbourhood? Having a LRT speed faster, more efficiently and greener along the empty dilapidated storefronts and prostitutes of King Street does nothing for my neighbourhood. 2-way streets would make a difference.

[the dude]

^^I've thought about that, but I still think taking cars off King even for a small stretch == complete retail death.

an interesting thought but i happen to believe the opposite is true. i think that king succeeds [and i use that term loosely] in spite of the traffic. if done properly i think the IV would fluorish as a pedestrian/transit mall. i mean look at main street. it's a wasteland. why? because of the traffic. at the very least we need to turn king into a two-lane, two-way street...pedestrianisation would be a nice bonus.

incidentally, we need to put LRT on main going both directions. i'm scared sh*tless that we're going to screw this up. this is a big expensive project. in the name of god, do it right the first time!

[coalminecanary]

The only major problem with this is the fact that Main would have two less lanes (three, if the city did the logical thing and widened the sidewalks), which - again - brings up the issue of two-way conversion for Main and King, and the whole nasty bunch of problems that go along with that - I'm thinking primarily of the 403 interchanges. In a perfect world, we would either be able to do those conversions, or the city would run LRT between King and Main (George), and go underground at Bay. This would, however, mean buying up property all along the line, demolishing part of the Fortino's plaza, constructing a new bridge across the 403, etc.

You could take main down to two one-way traffic lanes. LRT on main does not mean a forced two way conversion. However, I think that a 2-way conversion for main and King would be very beneficial - and we'd just nbeed to route local traffic to cannon/wilson - and through traffic can suck it up and take the rhv and linc - or the skyway - just like people use the dvp to get around toronto instead of driving up yonge. people will adjust - the only reason main is so busy right now is because the city has built it to accept that level of traffic!

The 403 ramps always come up and as always, I have to say - they are not a huge problem. Regardless of the street direction, these ramps should be converted to stoplights asap. There is no need to have ramps ONTO main nor off of king. So - you put a light at the end of each ramp and cars have to stop and pick a direction to travel. Yes, of course, it requires reconstruction of the ends of the ramps but it doesn't mean brand new bridges.

Just as in toronto where only some streets connect you to the gardiner, only king and aberdeen will get you onto the 403 - and main stays as a 403 off ramp terminus only (no on ramps from main). it's not as huge an issue as it's made out to be.

The only way LRT will directly help retail is by taking people to the retailer, so Eastgate Square Mall will be helped, but that's irrelevant to this part of the discussion. I agree with Flar that having the LRT run past the shops is unlikely to help them. Greater investment on the whole, more money and people in the downtown will help King Street shopping.

Having LRT running past the shops will help them. The direct benefit of delivering shoppers to the street is definitely a part of it but more importantly, LRT will spur all sorts of development - especially within "Eyeshot" of the rails. Much of this will be residential and, yes, these people will shop at the shops.

In the core, LRT on main will probably have the same effect on king retail as LRT on king (since they are so close together) but where they are further apart, the street chosen will definitely make a difference.

WHat about putting it on king william through the core? it would be pretty cool. but really, I think main is the best choice - for both directions. we need to avoid separating the lines, no matter what street gets chosen.

[go_leafs_go02]

You could take main down to two one-way traffic lanes. LRT on main does not mean a forced two way conversion. However, I think that a 2-way conversion for main and King would be very beneficial - and we'd just nbeed to route local traffic to cannon/wilson - and through traffic can suck it up and take the rhv and linc - or the skyway - just like people use the dvp to get around toronto instead of driving up yonge. people will adjust - the only reason main is so busy right now is because the city has built it to accept that level of traffic!

The 403 ramps always come up and as always, I have to say - they are not a huge problem. Regardless of the street direction, these ramps should be converted to stoplights asap. There is no need to have ramps ONTO main nor off of king. So - you put a light at the end of each ramp and cars have to stop and pick a direction to travel. Yes, of course, it requires reconstruction of the ends of the ramps but it doesn't mean brand new bridges.

Just as in toronto where only some streets connect you to the gardiner, only king and aberdeen will get you onto the 403 - and main stays as a 403 off ramp terminus only (no on ramps from main). it's not as huge an issue as it's made out to be.

I think that interchange is on a schedule to be rehabilitated and rebuilt in the next decade or so. Notice the ramp bridges has those jersey barriers protecting the railings now? They showed up I believe 2 years ago. Those bridges are I would assume close to 40 years old, and reaching the end of their life expectancy. We convert Main & King to 2-way, shut down the interchange for a period of time, and sure Aberdeen from the westbound 403, and York Blvd from the eastbound 403 can sustain the traffic for a year or two while the interchange gets redeveloped to work with 2 way and a LRT line.

I'm sure that interchange, along with the highway 6 northbound interchange are on the list of the MTO for future development. Both involve left exiting ramps, and those are a no-no for the MTO now due to driver confusion and the higher risk for an accident.


I guess we'll see though.

[omro]

Just trying to encourage a few more votes. :tup:

Despite some great arguments for and against in other threads, I still prefer the idea of both together on Main.

[Jon Dalton]

I have yet to formulate a solid opinion. Many pros and cons to weigh. Definitely against one-way LRT for any significant length of the route.

[adam]

A little off topic, but I am starting to realize that synchronizing red lights for 40km/hour would not be sufficient to slow down traffic. Every morning I drive my car down King St and watch drivers ZOOM past me at 70-80km/h while there is a red light directly ahead. I usually go 50km/h and arrive at THE SAME RED LIGHT a few seconds after them.

My question to you guys: what can be done to lower speeding, and consequently lower noise pollution and nasty fumes?? How can we get drivers to go 50-60km/h along city streets?

[Jon Dalton]

Speed sensors coupled with automatic spike belts.

[omro]

A little off topic, but I am starting to realize that synchronizing red lights for 40km/hour would not be sufficient to slow down traffic. Every morning I drive my car down King St and watch drivers ZOOM past me at 70-80km/h while there is a red light directly ahead. I usually go 50km/h and arrive at THE SAME RED LIGHT a few seconds after them.

My question to you guys: what can be done to lower speeding, and consequently lower noise pollution and nasty fumes?? How can we get drivers to go 50-60km/h along city streets?

My thoughts:

Unsynchronise the lights.
Have speed humps.

What's the general philosophy on automated speeding cameras?

[omro]

Any more wishing to vote? Thanks to the 22 of you that did!

[FairHamilton]

A little off topic, but I am starting to realize that synchronizing red lights for 40km/hour would not be sufficient to slow down traffic. Every morning I drive my car down King St and watch drivers ZOOM past me at 70-80km/h while there is a red light directly ahead. I usually go 50km/h and arrive at THE SAME RED LIGHT a few seconds after them.

My question to you guys: what can be done to lower speeding, and consequently lower noise pollution and nasty fumes?? How can we get drivers to go 50-60km/h along city streets?

The number one way to reduce speed on major streets like King or Main is, enforcement!!!

[SteelTown]

Anyone noticing Main St today? Main is reduced to two lanes from Dundurn to Hess, currently resurfacing Main St.

Traffic is backed up all the way to 403 ramp to Main.

[raisethehammer]

Anyone noticing Main St today? Main is reduced to two lanes from Dundurn to Hess, currently resurfacing Main St.

Traffic is backed up all the way to 403 ramp to Main.

GOOD! Let's keep it that way!

[MsMe]

I had to go to Dundas today and went on Burlington St. which also had some closed lanes due to the work being done on Ottawa St. So I got stuck in that. Then on the way back I went on Main St. It was nuts. That was mid afternoon I was coming back on Main St. It was like going to or from Toronto in a rush hour.

[SteelTown]

Traffic is now backed to 403, back to back traffic on the right side of 403 until around Highway 6. ECK!

[Millstone]

GOOD! Let's keep it that way!

But your precious buses won't get through! :shrug:

[drpgq]

But your precious buses won't get through! :shrug:

That is true. I often wonder what people think the optimal speed should be.

[crhayes]

Yeah I took Main home from school (Mac) today, and it was backed up all the way to the hospital at aroud 4:30. They REALLY should have had signs saying there was construction ahead, because I would have taken a different route...

[MsMe]

Yeah I took Main home from school (Mac) today, and it was backed up all the way to the hospital at aroud 4:30. They REALLY should have had signs saying there was construction ahead, because I would have taken a different route...

Got that right.
And welcome to the board Crhayes. :)

[SteelTown]

Yea it took me nearly 10 minutes from McMaster to Longwood, any other day it would take me less than a minute.

Tomorrow I'll just take Main to Wilson.

[MsMe]

Yea all this work is going to be a while yet before it's completed in both areas.

[crhayes]

Got that right.
And welcome to the board Crhayes. :)

Lol thanks, I have been surfing around here for months but never signed up. I am a real Hamilton advocate as I know many of you are!

I usually bus down to Mac, but I have a car to drive this week so I took it today. I didn't get over into the right lane (for the 403) fast enough...so I had to take Main all the way past Dundurn :(. I'd say It took a good 45 minutes from Mac to Dundurn lol...

[MsMe]

GOOD! Let's keep it that way!

Have you been told today RTH? LOL

[Gurnett71]

Traffic is now backed to 403, back to back traffic on the right side of 403 until around Highway 6. ECK!

Yeah, traffic was pretty much solid back to the 403/QEW/407 interchange in Burlington--thought it was an accident for sure until I heard the traffic report on CHML. Well, a few days of a slightly extended commute for a newly paved Main Street is a decent tradeoff in my mind...

[MsMe]

I usually bus down to Mac, but I have a car to drive this week so I took it today. I didn't get over into the right lane

Well I was nice and let at least 10 cars over today. :)

[raisethehammer]

Yeah I took Main home from school (Mac) today, and it was backed up all the way to the hospital at aroud 4:30. They REALLY should have had signs saying there was construction ahead, because I would have taken a different route...

FYI...signs have been up for about a month regarding this.
And no, I haven't been told....yet. lol

[adam]

But your precious buses won't get through! :shrug:

What's your point? For every bus that goes by, that's like 20 cars. If we took all the people in cars and put them in buses, we could do with 1 lane along King and Main thank you very much! :hell:

[Millstone]

Yeah, you think all those people in cars aren't carrying cargo with them? Maybe need to be on a set schedule, or go to another city in a moment's notice? Maybe they're on delivery, or don't want to deal with the occasional nasty on the bus? Snap back to reality, as Eminem might say.

[crhayes]

Got that right.
And welcome to the board Crhayes. :)

Regarding LRT, I agree that it would be ideal to have both east/west bound rails on the same street, and I initially thought that Main would be the best street. However, I have changed my mind. I think that it would be idea to run on main street from eastgate to the Delta, then cross over to King street through downtown to Gore Park. It would continue down King and around Paridise onto Main (like the B-Line bus now does) and cross infront of the University.

They are talking about turning Gore back into a pedestrian friendly, 'social' area, and having LRT running through Gore would significantly increase the number of people travelling through there.

[MsMe]

Regarding LRT, I agree that it would be ideal to have both east/west bound rails on the same street, and I initially thought that Main would be the best street. However, I have changed my mind. I think that it would be idea to run on main street from eastgate to the Delta, then cross over to King street through downtown to Gore Park. It would continue down King and around Paridise onto Main (like the B-Line bus now does) and cross infront of the University.

They are talking about turning Gore back into a pedestrian friendly, 'social' area, and having LRT running through Gore would significantly increase the number of people travelling through there.

It would be rather tricky crossing vehical traffic at the delta though. I have mentioned in another post, that Hamilton is strangely laid out in certain areas. And I mentioned as well, the Queenston traffic circle will also be a tricky area to deal with.

[crhayes]

Yeah looking at the layout on google maps, it would definitely be easier going all the way down Main street. Either way, Gore Park should really be incorporated into the LRT plan, especially if they plan on making it the 'social' center of the city.

I know this is crazy...but I think crazy is what Hamilton Needs....

What if they did something like this:
They brought the LTR all the way from Eastgate down Main street as planned. Right to the west of Catharine (between Main and King) there is a big parking lot (beside Taphouse).... after the LTR passes Catherine it makes a 90 (northward) through the parking lot (yes...conversion of one downtown parking lot!), makes a 90 onto King South (westward) , travels down King South to Hughson, makes a 90 onto Hughson (southwards) and then finally a 90 back onto Main (westwards). This would mean converting Hughson to a railway line/pedestrian only street (at least between King and Main), but being at Gore Park every day on my way to Mac Hughson is ALWAYS dead anyways.

With this conversion of Hughson King South from John to James could then be made pedestrian only, with an LTR rail included.

Now what to do with this new pedestrian only area is another topic, but I have ideas for that as well. Save those for another day :P

What do you think?

[Millstone]

Hughson could definitely be turned into a pedestrian street between King and Main.

edit: sorta kinda; delivery trucks and things like to service the banks there.

[adam]

Yeah, you think all those people in cars aren't carrying cargo with them? Maybe need to be on a set schedule, or go to another city in a moment's notice? Maybe they're on delivery, or don't want to deal with the occasional nasty on the bus? Snap back to reality, as Eminem might say.

What is reality? A 5 lane expressway where most vehicles are single-occupancy commuters? If half those people in the traffic jam yesterday would bother to carpool, they would have all been home in half the time.

[raisethehammer]

yea, those cars are carrying cargo alright. mcdonald's cups, hortons bags, oh yea and ONE PERSON PER VEHICLE.
A bus equals much more than 20 cars. I don't feel sorry for single occupancy car drivers for a split second. They've done enough damage to our city and society.

[Millstone]

What is reality? A 5 lane expressway where most vehicles are single-occupancy commuters? If half those people in the traffic jam yesterday would bother to carpool, they would have all been home in half the time.

So they're all going to the same place and are on the same schedule?

[Millstone]

Construction gridlock slows Hamilton traffic
TheSpec.com

John Burman

Commuters coming into Hamilton from the west end of the city or off Highway 403 eastbound face long delays due to construction.

Resurfacing and sidewalk work has Main Street West cut down to two lanes east of Dundurn Street South all the way to Hess Street.

Dundurn Street itself is not really an option to get around the delays because the turn lanes at Main Street West have been closed for the construction, causing delays for north and southbound traffic

The work began Tuesday morning, causing massive backups west of Dundurn Street as far as Longwood Road and slowed the Main Street ramp from Highway 403 to a crawl.

Motorists eastbound on 403, assuming the delay was due to a collision, left the highway at Aberdeen Avenue and tried to head north on Dundurn Street only to find the turn lanes at Main closed.

The construction should be finished toward the end of next month

[Millstone]

solution: get off at York Blvd or Aberdeen. Might as well use the alternate expressways for their intended purpose while they're still around.

[omro]

Anymore votes?

Come on, you know you wanna!

[highwater]

I tried the Aberdeen route. I swear I was moving back in time. Avoid at all costs.

[crhayes]

I was thinking about it, I think it would be better to have one route on King and one on Main.

The ultimate would be to have both on one street, but if they are to make dedicated LRT lanes I think it would be too much to take away two lanes from King or Main.

[omro]

I was thinking about it, I think it would be better to have one route on King and one on Main.

The ultimate would be to have both on one street, but if they are to make dedicated LRT lanes I think it would be too much to take away two lanes from King or Main.

And I totally disagree, which I've stated repeatedly. I won't go through them all again, there is a large post of mine earlier on explaining my point of view, if you want to go back in the thread and read it.

If you put one lane of LRT on King, you will NEVER get two way conversion on that street in the downtown as the road is too narrow in places to support it. Or you will never get a separate line on King or Main, you'll always be stuck with the single B line, however in the future you could get the B line on Main and a whole new line on King. Who knows.

Ultimately, if people are going to do a decent LRT, it needs to be two-tracks, each way, on the same street. Keep it simple and sensible people, please :)

[crhayes]

And I totally disagree, which I've stated repeatedly. I won't go through them all again, there is a large post of mine earlier on explaining my point of view, if you want to go back in the thread and read it.

If you put one lane of LRT on King, you will NEVER get two way conversion on that street in the downtown as the road is too narrow in places to support it. Or you will never get a separate line on King or Main, you'll always be stuck with the single B line, however in the future you could get the B line on Main and a whole new line on King. Who knows.

Ultimately, if people are going to do a decent LRT, it needs to be two-tracks, each way, on the same street. Keep it simple and sensible people, please :)

Two tracks each way on the same street would pretty much be all of main street, which means they would be guaranteed to share the lanes with cars regardless. I think they should try and make dedicated LRT lanes, so that transit is actually FASTER and not subject to being stuck in traffic.

But then who knows. If the streets were converted to two way I have no idea what the traffic would be like. Maybe it wouldn't be that bad.

[omro]

Two tracks each way on the same street would pretty much be all of main street, which means they would be guaranteed to share the lanes with cars regardless.

Not quite sure how you think it would take up "pretty much all of main street" - have you seen LRT in action up close recently?

I've seen the trams in Manchester and Nottingham (in the UK) within the last couple of months and believe me, they don't take up *that* much space at all!!

LRT takes up no more than one lane per direction.

If you put both directions on the same street, the LRT will actually probably take up only one and three-quarter lanes, because the LRT tracks can be tightly packed, as the trains can pass close by each other (as they are on a fixed rail).

Main is FIVE lanes. So I think you're a little mistaken there. ;)

[raisethehammer]

I tried the Aberdeen route. I swear I was moving back in time. Avoid at all costs.

??? explain. I use Aberdeen all the time.

[adam]

Uh oh .. maybe one of you will accuse the other of being drunk?? :hmmm:

[highwater]

??? explain. I use Aberdeen all the time.

When Main is down to one or two lanes, Aberdeen as an alternate is a disaster. It would probably be faster to stay on Main.

[highwater]

Uh oh .. maybe one of you will accuse the other of being drunk?? :hmmm:

Touche. :cheers:

[raisethehammer]

Lol....nice one.
Hmm, something must have been going on at Aberdeen. Maybe tons of people were getting off there?

[SteelTown]

Eastbound traffic on Aberdeen is bad. So that suggest people are exiting from 403 at Aberdeen instead of Main, likely all turning left on Queen.

[raisethehammer]

just go straight through to Bay and then go left. I've never seen it slow.

[Jon Dalton]

No problems getting home on the GO lately

[highwater]

Eastbound traffic on Aberdeen is bad. So that suggest people are exiting from 403 at Aberdeen instead of Main, likely all turning left on Queen.

The day I took Aberdeen as an alternate, traffic started slowing down on King W near Longwood. I then proceeded to crawl up Longwood suggesting that much of the traffic was trying to avoid Main. I took Bay back down to Main. Took about 45 minutes to get from King and Longwood to Bay and Aberdeen.

[Millstone]

The day I took Aberdeen as an alternate, traffic started slowing down on King W near Longwood. I then proceeded to crawl up Longwood suggesting that much of the traffic was trying to avoid Main. I took Bay back down to Main. Took about 45 minutes to get from King and Longwood to Bay and Aberdeen.

Almost worth it to get off at Hwy 6, come down around to York Blvd and get to where you're going from there.

[highwater]

Unfortunately I was coming from Westdale. Main and Longwood are your only options.

[raisethehammer]

Unfortunately I was coming from Westdale. Main and Longwood are your only options.

nope...get off at Hwy6, take your first right, right again to York Blvd and viola.

[omro]

I'm going to put this here, because I want to encourage a few more votes :), as well as a bit of debate.

Highwater told me yesterday that, when the streetcar was taken out to Westdale, the developer paid for it.

That got me thinking... so here's an idea...

Why don't the "people of Hamilton", perhaps even starting with a group like Hamilton Light Rail, form an independent corporation dedicated to obtaining funding from alternative sources and building an LRT how the "people" want it built? By-pass the local and provincial government bodies and their agendas.

Perhaps that's a bit "out there" for 2008 :haha:

[adam]

How can we convince a family with a 2 car garage that LRT is a viable alternative for transportation? Everyone's comments in the past few weeks are "golly gee, gas is sooo cheap now!"

[omro]

How can we convince a family with a 2 car garage that LRT is a viable alternative for transportation? Everyone's comments in the past few weeks are "golly gee, gas is sooo cheap now!"

Well, gas is only cheap for periods of time, the cost will rise again and when it does, it will probably rise steeply.

Anyway, my idea was just a thought :)

[ryan_mcgreal]

How can we convince a family with a 2 car garage that LRT is a viable alternative for transportation? Everyone's comments in the past few weeks are "golly gee, gas is sooo cheap now!"

LRT projects introduced in the 1990s and early 2000s, when gas was much cheaper than it is today, were still highly successful at attracting new riders.

[adam]

good point.

[omro]

I'm liking the fact that both tracks on Main seems to be the clear leader in this little poll.

I'm wondering if there will be any form of public poll/referendum on this matter?

[omro]

So both lanes on Main have totally and definitively been dropped?

[adam]

While they have the shovels in the ground for LRT construction, why not update the 1950's style 1-ways too? We should look to other urban centres in North America - when they do updates on the road system, they are not converting to 1-way streets... so why are we working so hard to maintain ours?

[markbarbera]

Two-way conversion of King and Main is already being planned. No one is working hard to maintain them as one-way.

[Millstone]

While they have the shovels in the ground for LRT construction, why not update the 1950's style 1-ways too? We should look to other urban centres in North America - when they do updates on the road system, they are not converting to 1-way streets... so why are we working so hard to maintain ours?

The 1-ways aren't even maintained that well, save for the resurfacing of Main at Queen to Dundurn last year. There isn't a road except RHVP that's truly in great shape the whole length here, regardless of its traffic pattern.

[adam]

When LRT goes in they will have to resurface the road, repaint lines, rework traffic lights, etc So its a perfect opportunity to convert to 2-way.
This would be the most cost effective time to do the conversions, while shovels are already in the ground.


ps - completely off topic, but just to reply to Millstone's comment on road maintenance: the streets on the major arteries in Hamilton are in fantastic shape. Take a trip to Toronto or Vancouver or any other major city sometime and do a comparison. And those cities are thriving.

[omro]

So both lanes on Main have totally and definitively been dropped?

Sorry, I wasn't talking about two way traffic, though that would be great. I meant two way LRT on Main.

[highwater]

Two-way conversion of King and Main is already being planned.

It is? Since when? Where did you hear this?

[markbarbera]

It is? Since when? Where did you hear this?

The Downtown Master Plan 5-year review (http://www.myhamilton.ca/NR/rdonlyres/D4EE4E50-18A0-4C99-8DC9-1555133EC456/0/TTR_DTMPreview_20080624.pdf) was presented last summer. Unless I am mistaken, the recommendations for two-way conversion was accepted by council, with the exception of King Street conversion, which was deferred to coincide with the rapid transit planning now underway. The report doesn't mention Main Street, so I was wrong to include it in my original statement.

[Millstone]

When LRT goes in they will have to resurface the road, repaint lines, rework traffic lights, etc So its a perfect opportunity to convert to 2-way.
This would be the most cost effective time to do the conversions, while shovels are already in the ground.


ps - completely off topic, but just to reply to Millstone's comment on road maintenance: the streets on the major arteries in Hamilton are in fantastic shape. Take a trip to Toronto or Vancouver or any other major city sometime and do a comparison. And those cities are thriving.

These are not in fantastic shape:

1) King east of Wellington (not TOO bad, just rough)
2) Burlington east of Sherman
3) Wellington at Burlington and south to Barton
4) Rymal Rd
5) Kenilworth from Burlington to Barton
6) Barton St through the village... almost
7) (Lower) Centennial Rd
8) Victoria north of Barton
9) Jolley Cut (poor sightlines and geometry, as discussed in other thread)
10) Upper Wellington south of the Linc
11) Most of former Hwy 8 through Stoney Creek

Plus the recent Spectator article about all the lines fading.

And it's not really a contest to figure out who has the worst roads. Any place can set an example either way. Toronto's allowed to not have great roads because their mayor states how much they hate cars. Vancouver I have no idea.

:banana:

[adam]

Something I didn't mention in the last post is that Toronto also has a lot more traffic than Hamilton and is doing a lot better economically. Road resurfacing doesn't lead to a city's prosperity, so why should we put money into resurfacing? Counsellors always say we aren't a rich municipality. Here's an excellent opportunity to redirect some money and put it into something sustainable like LRT or wider sidewalks.

Wider Sidewalks, bike lanes and better pedestrian access, unlike roads, don't have to be fixed up every year after the winter. You build them and they last. They improve lifestyles and encourage city growth.

[omro]

Just to go back from the tagent to two-way road traffic (which would be also cool), does anyone know if the concept of a two-way LRT on Main has been totally dropped?

[SteelTown]

They'll still be two way LRT on Main St from University Plaza to Paradise Road and from Delta to Eastgate.

From Paradise to Delta it's either:
One way LRT
Two Way LRT on King

[markbarbera]

While Hamilton's Rapdi Transit office has restricted consideration to those two options, the Netrolinx BCA will have no restrictions to its study options.

[highwater]

What's the reasoning for the restrictions? Main seems a better candidate for two-way than King.

[SteelTown]

If two way on King it'll turn Main St two way, instead of 5 lanes it'll be 4 lanes, two lanes for each direction, with perhaps bigger sidewalks.

Two way LRT on King will turn King two way as well but no curbside parking, I'm sure International Village will hate this.

To me the best option is still one way LRT from Paradise to Delta. Have LRT on the second lane to have curbside parking.

[Jon Dalton]

I couldn't see business going down if King St. became 2-way and LRT at the same time. The benefits would outweigh the loss of street parking. Look at how busy Spadina is around the streetcar right of way - when this was proposed, businesses objected for the same reasons.

The results of the study surprised me - I thought they would favour Main over King, and tend to retain one-way car traffic.

[omro]

I'm a bit shocked, at no point in the past was King Street for two-way LRT ever mentioned, unless I've missed something.

If LRT goes two-way down King, surely it can't be in dedicated lanes, otherwise you won't be able to have car traffic on certain parts of it.

[markbarbera]

Exactly my thoughts, Omro. And if the LRT doesn't have dedicated right of way, you may as well not even bother with it, because you'll only end up with a streetcar like what's on Toronto's streets, which can be considered anything but rapid transit. At least buses can weave through traffic. A streetcar stuck in traffic is a step back. LRT must have its right-of-way if it is to work properly. Perhaps the experts at metrolinx can bring some common sense back into the equation.

[omro]

Exactly my thoughts, Omro. And if the LRT doesn't have dedicated right of way, you may as well not even bother with it, because you'll only end up with a streetcar like what's on Toronto's streets, which can be considered anything but rapid transit. At least buses can weave through traffic. A streetcar stuck in traffic is a step back. LRT must have its right-of-way if it is to work properly. Perhaps the experts at metrolinx can bring some common sense back into the equation.

Are they planning to pedestrianise King then? International village with two-way LRT would only work if it were closed to cars, otherwise you're totally right - it'll just end up being a streetcar constrained by traffic. OK lane sharing happens in parts of many tram systems in the UK, however in areas where they want some speed, they are in dedicated lanes/streets.

Why is money being wasted by having Hamilton do one assessment and Metrolinx another? Who has the final say?

[SteelTown]

That'll take away the curbside parking along International Village (it's the narrowest part of King St) to accommodate two way LRT and single two way car traffic.

[markbarbera]

It's on Metrolinx' dime, so they will be doing the BCA and proposing what they see as the best RT /route concept for the city. The city of course can approve or reject their proposal.

Hamilton's Rapid Transit Office will be allowing for public output, as will Metrolinx, so it's up to us to let them know what we think on the proposed route. Right now I don't think they're in sync with many - in particular those who will be using the LRT.

[markbarbera]

As an aside, I see the map that illustrates the 25-year vision of Hamilton's B-L-A-S-T system shows the B-Line eventually extended north along Centennial to the QEW.

[mishap]

As an aside, I see the map that illustrates the 25-year vision of Hamilton's B-L-A-S-T system shows the B-Line eventually extended north along Centennial to the QEW.
At a public meeting a few months back, we were told that it wasn't going north at Centennial, but rather Fifty Road! Yet they still won't go into Dundas...

[omro]

That'll take away the curbside parking along International Village (it's the narrowest part of King St) to accommodate two way LRT and single two way car traffic.

Is that considered to be a good thing though? People want the curbside parking don't they?

[SteelTown]

^
If two way on King it'll turn Main St two way, instead of 5 lanes it'll be 4 lanes, two lanes for each direction, with perhaps bigger sidewalks.

Two way LRT on King will turn King two way as well but no curbside parking, I'm sure International Village will hate this.

To me the best option is still one way LRT from Paradise to Delta. Have LRT on the second lane to have curbside parking.

[Blurr]

I was on the Main St. two way boat, but after seeing this I think I am leaning towards King two way.

I think that the downtown square on King is unique and beautiful and is something that should be shown to everyone who rides LRT. Missing the square will be a lost opportunity for the downtown core of downtown. Also the plethora of empty lots/ parking lots north of King in the downtown area will have excellent potential of being developed if LRT is on King.

As for the international village, sure, some things will change (maybe some store types need curbside parking), but the increased visibility in a vibrant, walkable downtown core will improve the situation of the area, and attract stores that appreciate the benefits of LRT.